CR has never lost a lawsuit to my knowledge, proving that all of the lawsuits brought against them were frivolous at best.
The key words are "to my knowledge" and it proves nothing. Most such cases are settled out of court with nondisclosure so, in fact, one will never know. Frivolity may be in the eye of the beholder.
When you have person who is a known GM-hater on a company's Board of Directors, of course that company will be biased against domestics. Fourtunately this America-hater only got like 4% of the votes in the year 2000...
Actually, in my own experiences with import and domestic vehicles, I've found my imports from Japan have met the EPA ratings, or bettered them for gas mileage, and my domestic could not achieve the EPA ratings, and could only do worse. I took it to mean that the Japanese simply make superior and far more efficient drive trains and components that keep on giving you peak MPG. The domestics are always breaking down and never at 100% and hence give worse than mediocre mileage.
The fact of the matter is that my Dodge with 130 horses gave me the exact same fuel economy as my Honda with 240 horses. The Dodge was from the mid 90's and the Honda from 2003, but the Honda was also about 1,000 lbs heavier, and the bigger vehicle with a bigger 3.0L V6 vs. a smaller 2.0L I4 in the Dodge.
'21 BMW X3 M40i, '15 Audi S4, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
The truth is, I think the Acura TL interior looks great, of high quality, well assembled, and well thought-out!
I think your pictures show that the TL is indeed, still the superior automobile with the superior interior and interior quality and fit and finish. I believe some of the so-called flaws you point out are really just design and styling choices, ques, and flavor! Color matching and coordination are purely 100% subjective. What you think matches might clash to me.
I'd take the TL interior anyday over the CTS. I looked over and test drove the new CTS. It's a very good car, but I don't care for the multiple layered, multiple material, multiple textured dashboard and console area. The soft fabric dashboard just doesn't work for me.... it looks and feels like an add-on a taxi cab driver uses. It reminds me of a dash board cover/mat sold aftermarket (I think some buy these to reduce glare in the sun on the windshield).
'21 BMW X3 M40i, '15 Audi S4, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
CU once listed all of the lawsuits filed in their history, going back to 1936, IIRC.
The number was fewer than 10, and all were basically "sour grapes / shoot the messenger" suits filed by companies whose products or services didn't score very well. In no case did CU lose -- most were dismissed by the courts at the first stage of the trials.
Secondly, the 2008 Cadillac CTS should have been rated #1. Instead, the Acura TL which is just an obsolete Honda Accord wearing Groucho Marx noseglasses beats the 2008 CTS. Let me get this straight: A front wheel Accord with an old V6 engine from the 1990's and a clunky 5-speed transmission beats the illustrious CTS?
Yes!! You got it straight. Isn't it amazing that the long-in-the-tooth Accord makeover beats a Cadillac according to CR? What does that say about the Standard of the World, the most recent engineering marvel from GM getting beat by an old Accord.
And, another magazine, R&T, confirms that that old Accord makeover, having the inferior FWD, actually beats the higher powered/torqued 08 CTS in a number of "measured" tests. These are: 0-60, 0-100, braking from 60, skidpad, fuel mileage. The disadvantaged FWD Accord makeover somehow manages 66.0 mph in slalom vs the "superior" RWD CTS which recorded a 66.6 mph. See R&T Feb 08 issue, page 96.
Supposedly, the TL will be redesigned for 09. Look for it to clobber the CTS in reviews by CR and R&T.
It went down because of the usual criticism -- distinctly unsporty handling.
So you finally agree with the bias at CR? :P
This is where CR shows its bias toward a certain type of vehicle. Do you really think that the consumers who are buying cars in this country are really looking for "sporty handling"? I feel and know that CR auto reviewers do like the sporty driving and feel that cars should drove that way. They will try and say it is for safety but can anyone with a straight face really say the Camry and ES's are not safe? Now C&D can have that bias because that is what we know they are about and who their consumers are.
I know you're asking tongue-in-cheek, but CR rates both the Altima and Accord ahead of the Camry, just like C&D. It can't be just on the basis of handling, because the Mazda 6 is only about midpack. Even the Optima 4-cylinder rates a smidge higher than the Camry 4.
Sporty handling or not? Well, since I'm now a **cough** "mature" driver, I don't need super-sporty handling. Besides compared to what I learned to drive on and had during my younger years, the Camry is sporty enough for me (see my profile on past car ownership).
Besides compared to what I learned to drive on and had during my younger years, the Camry is sporty enough for me (see my profile on past car ownership).
And yet it was stated above that Camry came in below others because it's handling was not "sporty" enough. nuf said. There is bias at CR. I would think that since they are not a "sports" oriented media outlet they would not have "sporty" as one of their criteria and go with what mainstream US desires.
No, I had said in post #454 that Car and Driver had placed the Camry 5th out of 7 midsize cars tested for the March issue mainly because of perceived handling deficiencies.
CR by contrast (as of the Feb issue which does not include the new Malibu), had the Camry 4-cylinder as 4th out of 15 "affordable family sedans" and the Camry V6 as 3rd out of 15 "midpriced family sedans" (and the Camry Hybrid as 5th). This is based on their road tests, but when reliability is taken into account, the Camry V6 is not recommended.
In a separate "quick picks" sidebar in CR, only the Mazda 6, Subaru Legacy, and Nissan Altima V6 are listed as "sporty sedans." The Camry, including the Hybrid, are among the many "all around family cars" and the Hybrid is the only one cited under "best fuel economy."
I apologise for sounding condescending. I ask that you don't take offense to it, however. Mainly, because it causes the very message I'm trying to express to go on ignored. After all, who wants to listen to a condescending jerk? And for that I apologise. It's important for you, Backy and others to understand that I mean no offense to you guys whatsoever! This is just the way I try to make a point, that's all. The reader isn't to blame, since much of this demands that you pay careful attention to what I write, and sometimes it gets lenghthy, and I have a lot of ideas regarding import bias at Consumer Reports to get across.
Your "I like how the TL looks and it looks better than the CTS interior" completely misses my point. What I was trying to show was clear and obvious manufacturing and assembly defects in these Acura's that are not at all stated in Consumer Report's review of the car. My ultimate aim is to show the reader that we have import bias at Consumer Reports, and I am supplying the evidence that the reader may take into account. I'm glad you like the TL design over the CTS design. While Eyes on Design (headed by Chris Bangle of BMW Group) disagrees with you, "to each his own..."
Since every picture posted on the internet shows these same defects, we can surmise that these are bona-fide fit and finish defects with the car and not just "one car out of a million." Consumer Reports, if they wish to be unbiased, must be fair in their report of the problems with the Acura TL, and all import-branded cars.
Lol. The current Acura TL in both engineering and technology is undercut by just about every auto manufacturer out there. Heck Honda doesn't even have a V8, and the current powerplant and drivetrain choices they do have rely on ancient technology that's not much more advanced than their VTEC V6 that saw service in 1989!
An I4 that generates the same torque as a 1996 Chevy Cavalier, a V6 that doesn't even have VVT on the exhaust cam let alone advances like direct-injection and a clumsy 5-speed automatic transmission represents the bulk of Honda's powertrains and also represents the best Honda engineers can do. Pathetic. Just pathetic.
Sounding like a condescending jerk is only part of it. The bigger problem, and why I gave up trying to have a dialogue with you awhile ago, is that the basic logic of your argument is flawed, you frequently give false information to state your case, and you state your opinions as if they were incrontrovertable fact. There's only so much of that I can take before I have to ask Mr. Kyle to beam me up.
210delrey, why is it that a sporty car like the Altima gets 1st place, yet a car that's absolutely un-sporty like the Camry is just below in Consumer Reports rankings? Why would a car with a rough ride, tight turning circle, very nimble handling, a sportscar cockpit, ride with high levels of road noise and a racey-sounding engine score right next to a wallowing behemoth with a quiet engine, "floating on a cloud" ride, wide, hard-to-park turning circle, subdued road and wind noise, and a luxury car inspired interior? Saying, "Because one's a sporty sedan and the other is a family sedan" doesn't answer it, because both are rated right next to each other. If C/R praises the quiet ride in the Camry, why don't they criticise the rough, bumpy ride in the Altima? If they praise the performance and handling of the Altima, why not criticise the lack thereof in the Camry?
I can't see how both the Altima and Camry can score like right next to each other unless, of course, both of these cars are imports.
I'd love for you to point out where the legions of Acura TL owners are complaining about fit and finish and material quality defects in their TL's!!!!
I have found and noticed TL's scoring extremely well in reliability studies. I haven't seen too many complaints about the TL from it's owners. If these issues you claim were widespread, wouldn't you think the forums would be full of TL complaints?
'21 BMW X3 M40i, '15 Audi S4, '16 Audi TTS, Wife's '19 VW Tiguan SEL 4-Motion
I urge everyone who takes you seriously to research your claims. I am not saying you lack a case but your information revolving around it is misguided and ironically -- biased.
For example, your point in this post is, once again, moot. What great GM technology is so your worship? What has GM really accomplished architecturally that Honda in all its F1 glory has not? And why has GM referred to Honda (the number one engine builder in the world) for engine technology and for utilizing its engines in some vehicles? What significant difference, pcm4, does the 3.6 DI make that justifies CR to rate the CTS number one? The TL engine is no more "ancient technology" than say (not to sound proverbial) any other garden variety production engine. Let's not forget that we are still dealing with a four stroke, gasoline powered engine that hasn't, in all its years, managed to achieve any great strides in efficiency. For your information, Ford's model T also achieved 25mpg and gave up most energy as heat. Nothing much has changed. Yes, there is a logical conspiracy behind this delay in advancement; however, I will not divulge the politics on this board.
Yes, the TL engine was derived out of the late 1980's NSX program, a car far more advanced than anything GM engineered until today. The NSX engine still, in many ways, supersedes the LS7 C6 Corvette's (an engine based on 1960's technology) and the TL's engine technology is on par in many ways to the CTS's. Let's not even get into the hybrid or hydrogen technology that Honda is kicking in the face of GM.
For argument's sake, what difference does it matter to a Honda owner as long as the TL has better fuel economy and better overall performance than the CTS? Not much. Hence, what is the urgency on Honda's part to make a change? Profits are strong at Honda and now that GM has caught up in "ancient technology", we will expect Honda to outdo itself, once again, with the next model.
All in all, let's just say that Honda got into the automotive business to support its racing habit -- the mother of technology in the automotive world.
PS: I don't hate GM; in fact, I like their newer products. I just want to set the record strait.
For argument's sake, what difference does it matter to a Honda owner as long as the TL has better fuel economy and better overall performance than the CTS?
Besides performance, add value. According to CR, March 08 issue, page 51, the TL has a price of $33,670 vs $40,835 for CTS. That is a 21 percent premium for a lesser vehicle in the CTS. You pay more for CTS and get less. Exception would be gross weigh. CTS is a porker, but maybe some would say this is a positive for having "road hugging" weight.
Most such cases are settled out of court with nondisclosure so, in fact, one will never know.
LOL, but you know tidester. :P
Seems if my product is falsely libeled and I am losing sales, the last thing I would want is nondisclosure. The first thing I would want is a written retraction from the reporting source, then monetary compensation.
2020 Honda Accord EX-L, 2011 Hyundai Veracruz, 2010 Mercury Milan Premiere, 2007 Kia Optima
2007 recall data shows that GM had the fewest vehicle recalls of all major OEMs. Toyota/Honda had a few more even thought they sold fewer vehicles. Ford is the one the sticks out with a huge quantity.
Again data shows that quality, as measured by things gone wrong, is pretty much even now.
I forget what the '06 data was exactly but it was onlyslightly higher than '07.
OK, a good, friendly post with good points that I'd like to either clarify or agree with. First off, very little of Honda's otherwise fantastic F1 program actually makes its way down to the Honda vehicle. The last and only time Honda applied F1 technology was in the first VTEC engine that powered the NSX, as you know. The SH-AWD has no real F1 heritage behind it. There is nothing that the consumer vehicle can benefit from an F1 racing program. Think of it: 800 horsepower with very little torque can't be applied to automobiles. This is why the LS7 is a better consumer engine than the V8 that powers the Ferrari F430 (just look at the numbers: Z06 = 505/495 and gets around 17 MPG and F430 = 485/350 and gets around 14 MPG). There is nothing carbon fiber unequal control arms can benefit strut towers. There is no benefit in a 400 microsecond paddle shift (by virtue, inexpensive luxo-boats like the G35 have paddle shifters that meet or exceed Ferrari F1 in terms of shift speed). So don't think for a moment thAt Honda's F1 program is seeing its winning ways down to garden vareity Honda vehicles.
THe last Honda product GM ever used was a SOHC V6 that Saturn had to use before widespread implimentation of the better engine: GM's 3.6 liter global engine/6 speed Hydramatic transmission pair. If anything, Honda needs to source a V8 from GM, preferably the LS3. The Northstar V8 would be nice, also. And judging by the turbo Ecotec, Honda can disparge their F20C and replace it with said turbo Ecotec.
You acknowledge that Honda is behind the times as far as drivetrain technology is concerned, and that's good. Your excuse is politics, and you may be correct. Probably related to new CAFE or CARB requirements, but I'm not entirely sure...
The NSX fell behind when the first 21st-Century Corvette Z06 was released in 2002. As far as an "NSX versus LS^" comparison is concerned, there is none. The Honda VTEC V6 was advanced for its time, but that was years and years ago. The engine by todays standards is a turd that can barely squeak out 290 horsepower at less than 250 ft/lbs torque. It had VVT on the intake cam only. There were no dual intake runners and no variable phasing. Titanium con-rods are fine, though. There is, of course, no comparison with the LS7, which is a detuned version of Chevrolet's C6-R engine -- the winningest engine at LeMans now for eight years straight. Thus, we're comparing a V6 that's sub-standard in virtually every respect to a garden-vareity V6 today with a detuned engine that's familiar with winning podium finishes in the world's most prestigious endurance races. How you think the two (LS7 versus 1st-generation VTEC V6) can be compared is far beyond my very considerable level of comprehension. I don't even think a delusional 16 year-old masturbating to the tuner layouts in the latest issue of Sport Compact magazine would make such a fanatical claim. Let's move on.
I don't think Honda will "outdo itself with the next model" or any model for that matter. Honda's latest products are already yielding to GM products, such as the Malibu. Honda yielded to Saturn when Saturn introduced the Sky RedLine and Honda took the S2000 of the market. Car and Driver is already saying the Ecotec is more refined than Honda's I4 workhorse. Not just "as refined", but more refined. Acura products aren't anything groundbreaking. Honda's former good fit and finish is now the industry average. They don't have the money to support any meaningful hybrid program (and we know the FCX and other hydrogen vehicles are just window dressing). We'll never see a decent hybrid on the Ridgeline like we've seen GM do with the second-generation hybrid powertrain on the Tahoe Hybrid (as it now stands, GM is now the industry leader in hybrid technologies, since Toyota is still meandering in the maze of mediocracy with their first-generation hybrid platforms).
I agree Honda has an excellent racing program, but let's not forget their absence at Lemans and ALMS -- the racing program that Chevrolet domi
First off, very little of Honda's otherwise fantastic F1 program actually makes its way down to the Honda vehicle.
Unless one is an engineering director at Honda, how can this be said with certainty? Is it possible that some of the numerous processes, sub-processes and engineering methods/disciplines used in F1 program in designing/building engines/transmissions are passed on to mundane everyday design/engineering for Honda street cars? Are personnel in the F1 program rotated to production Honda engineering?
I agree Honda has an excellent racing program, but let's not forget their absence at Lemans and ALMS -- the racing program that Chevrolet domi
Let's not forget that Chevrolet became non-competitive in IRL and dropped out. The engines supplied by Honda to IRL have shown to be highly reliable over last few seasons. What an embarassment to GM and Chevrolet that the world's premier racing event, INDY 500, has had a starting grid of all cars powered by Honda.
People watching the 500 on TV in US and all around world are made aware of this and all the cars have Honda brand prominently displayed. Surely, Roger Penske has the "IN" with GM to get Chevrolet engines and racing support from them if he thought that Chevrolet was better than Honda. Penske, of course, uses Honda.
GM's showcase of racing to America is NASCAR and these cars are powered by dinosaur engines with pushrods and carburators. Really high-tech, eh? Toyota had to build an ancient engine design in order to compete in NASCAR.
But, getting back to who builds better engines, let's look at April 07 issue of CR at reliability ratings. Look at Engine Major and Engine Minor. Acura and Accord mostly show full red cirlces, a few half red circles and a half-black circle for S2000 in year 02. Next, check out Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet, Pontiac, Saturn. Find a lot of black circles, half black circles. Saab, who is owned by GM has lots of black. The Cadillac Deville, Seville models have a lot of black circles.
The Chevrolet Corvette V8, for years 2001-2006, with 12 rating circles, only manages 6 full red circles.
Contrast Engine Major and Engine Minor ratings of GM vehicles years 2001-2006 to long-in-the-tooth Accord makeover model "Acura". For six Acura models shown, and 58 ratings, 55 of those ratings are full red circle and 3 are half-red circle.
Case Closed. GM has not shown by CR that it can build a better engine than Honda/Acura, "The Engine Company".
OK, I'll bite... First off, NASCAR is just a rolling advertisement and little more. I can't see how anyone thinks NASCAR is a venerable or verifiable intrnational racing circuit. It's just something rednecks like watching to pass time on a saturday afternoon while slugging down a cold Budweiser. Why you brought it up defies reason or logic.
Secondly, if Honda was all about reliability (to the extent that they wouldn't use an engine that risks getting anything under C/R's "Red doughnut"), then why do they cotinue with average cars like the Oddessey? Or S2000? Or TSX? Or any other car that's equipped with the F20C and its turbo variants? Why don't they axe them or insist that the engine be removed from all models? I'll tell you why: It's because cars equipped with said engines are selling, and their reliability is good enough. So good, in fact, that there's no real need to replace them. With exception to three recalls, the engine has been doing just fine.
So, why then dosn't Honda source a V8 from GM? It can't be because GM's V8's pull Average reliability ratings; the answer is obviously because GM is not giving Honda permission to do so. Honda does not have their own resources to bring a V8 to market. Furthermore, Honda is not sourcing another automobile manufacturer to aquire a V8. The only explination we are left with, therefore, is that the other automobile manufacturers are not selling Honda any V8 engines, meaning Honda is stuck with archaic and technologically inept SOHC V6's and feeble I4's (this also explains why Honda does not have a premium luxury brand. And no, Acura does not count as a luxury brand). Not to mention an oversupply of old 5 speed transmissions from the 1990's they have to work through.
As for IRL, that's fine that Honda is teh Numero Uno there. I'm happy for them, and Penske is, too. May Honda keep on winning and winning there. How this will help them bring modern technology to the consumer like GM is doing I do not know, but GOOO Honda!
Unless one is an engineering director at Honda, how can this be said with certainty? Is it possible that some of the numerous processes, sub-processes and engineering methods/disciplines used in F1 program in designing/building engines/transmissions are passed on to mundane everyday design/engineering for Honda street cars? Are personnel in the F1 program rotated to production Honda engineering?
The only way Honda can become competitive in the automotive sector is if they drop their SOHC behemoths and clunky transmissions, add a V8 to their lineup somehow and start making environmentally-concious products (think Honda Ridgeline hybrid). Just making a bunch of cheap, I4 economy cars and family sedans won't cut it while Toyota and GM are making hybrid powertrains that use less fuel than the Honda trucks yet are towing and carrying a lot more. It would be nice to actually see a substantial lineup from Honda in the first place. Heck. Honda doesn't even have a real sportscar. In that respect, Honda isn't farther ahead than Kia or Hyundai, for cryin' out loud! Honda does not have the following models in their lineup, whereas a normal car manufacturer does: 1/2-ton pickup truck Sportscar that can go to 60 MPH in under like 8 seconds. Premium sedan (RL doesn't count. A premium sedan has to seat more than like four little people and carry more than a purse with a small bag of groceries.) Premium truck Large SUV Something with a hybrid powertrain. I mean, at least something on four wheels here. A luxury car division. Acura doesn't count, because Acura's are just rebadged Honda econo-boxes and family sedans. A really, really fast exotic sportscar. Even Toyota is making progress here. A large sedan, premium or not.
Honda has a sub-compact (Fit), Compact (Civic), Lots of family sedans (Accord, TSX, TL, RL), Compact SUV (Pilot, CR-V), and a roadster (S2000). They need more than this to survive and flourish.
Honda might also think about replacing their design team. Why? Maybe this should help:
And we all know who the chief Designer in charge of designing the two vehicles shown above, it must have been this little fella:
Speedjerk: "PMC, I urge everyone who takes you seriously to research your claims. I am not saying you lack a case but your information revolving around it is misguided and ironically -- biased."
The problem with you urging everyone to resarch my claims is that after they do research my claims, they'll end up with the same conclusions I'm ending up with. ...And we already know what those conclusions are.
Just read the car reviews in the March issue of CR. I'd describe those articles as a "love in" for GM. Tons of positive comments about the CTS and Malibu, and about GM in general. In this issue, they tested the CTS 3.6 against the BMW 328i, Mercedes C300, and Saab 9-3, and the CTS came out on top. CR made specific mention of how GM has given other luxury car makers a "wake up call" with the CTS. Overall in the class, the CTS ranks 3rd now, behind the G35 FWD and Acura TL. Considering all the excellent cars behind it, it shows how bullish CR is on the new CTS.
On the Malibu, it's now CR's fourth-ranked family car, in a tie point-wise with the Camry and just two points behind the 2nd-place Accord, also a new design this year. The Altima is on top of the group. As with the CTS, CR was very positive about the Malibu in its comments.
So much for CR being biased against U.S. cars. Yup, they are so biased that they rank a U.S. car above long-term luxury stalwarts such as the 3 Series and Mercedes, and in a virtual tie with the two long-time benchmarks of the family car class, the Accord and Camry. Apparently the "Bash the U.S. Cars" team at CR has taken a sabbatical.
Now if only the "Bash Honda" leader here could take a break, we could move on.
Overall in the class, the CTS ranks 3rd now, behind the G35 FWD and Acura TL.
On the Malibu, it's now CR's fourth-ranked family car, in a tie point-wise with the Camry and just two points behind the 2nd-place Accord, also a new design this year. The Altima is on top of the group.
funny, but hasn't CR rated the asians above everyone else? Looks like that continues. CTS is wonderful but not quite good enough. Same with Malibu. Sorry but I am not saying CR is biased but your proof does not prove otherwise.
I don't see how anyone can view the March issue of C/R as a "love-in" for General Motors... What we're actually starting to see is the first exposure of what has historically been the automobile industry's most blatant fraud: The BMW 3-Series. Make no mistake, this fraud is prevalent in the US only.
In Europe, the BMW 3-Series is viewed as a practical alternative to walking or riding a bicycle. That's why most taxi's in Europe are BMW 3-Series cars. What BMW does is they take a $12,000 BMW 3-Series, add vinyl to its interior, add an upgraded stereo and remove the 80 horsepower diesel engine and replace it with an engine that's only slightly less crude: a 230 horsepower V6 that barely eeks out 198 ft/lbs of torque. Because by their very nature, taxi's are a cheap source of transportation with cheap drivetrains. The 3-Series is no exception, which explains why you get an automatic transmission with the 328i if and only if you're lucky. If you're not, you're stuck with a manual transmission, which is the same kind of transmission that's also standard in the $2,500 Tata Nano economy car. For all 3-Series cars headed stateside, interiors are upgraded from mouse fur seating surfaces to naugahyde seating surfaces. Wood inserts are added where there was exposed sheetmetal. Luxury features such as air conditioning and power windows come standard, whereas they are options on all 3-Series taxi's in Europe.
The automatic transmission that's used in the upgraded 3-Series is General Motor's Turbo Hydramatic 6-speed unit.
Here's the 3-Series typically seen on Europe's streets:
Here's the same car but with the $30,000 increase in sticker price you pay for in options, such as air conditioning, vinyl seating surfaces and some strips of wood, that typify a US-issue 3-Series:
So as we can see, it's not like the 2008 CTS was up against any significant competition or anything...
Same thing for the Mercedes Benz C-Class: Nothing but a glorified European taxi:
^^^ What's luxury in our country is a taxi/beater in Europe, because Mercedes Benz knows that wealthy people in the US are dumb. So dumb in fact that they know you can throw anything, regardless of how rudimentary -- with a 3-pointed star on it to rich Americans and the American will buy it. A $17,000 taxi sold in America with leatherette seats, an upgraded stereo and air conditioning for a whopping $40,000. Ca-ching!!!
Not a taxi, and not a Eropean econo-box with power windows and air conditioning. Just the world's finest luxury sport sedan, folks:
So, in closing, let's not get all suprised that the world's finest sport sedan really did beat out the taxis in Consumer Report's testing in March. THere's only so long Consumer Reports can carry on the frauds on wheels by Benz and BMW.
We are only now beginning to see the revealing of these European frauds. Likewise, we are starting to see the fit and finish frauds fro Japan; that Japanese family cars are no better and no worse than their domestic counterparts. There's only so long Consumer Reports can carry these automotive frauds before the truth comes pounding on their doors.
Except for you saying Consumer Reports is not biased, you're correct. It's no suprise the CTS beat out the European taxi's, but likewise, it's no surprise the CTS lost to the Accord/TL with Consumer Reports, because the TL is an import.
I've already explained at lenght that the domestic car that's considered the finest sport sedan in the world was beat by a front wheel sedan built on a flimsy family sedan platform with an outdated SOHC engine and clunky, 1990's era transmission just because the former is a domestic and the latter is an import.
I apologise for displaying these very disturbing photographs, but we have to be reminded that these taxis are being sold on this side of teh Atlantic for luxury car prices.
If you're not, you're stuck with a manual transmission, which is the same kind of transmission that's also standard in the $2,500 Tata Nano economy car.
Oh, I pretty much figured that a long time ago. But it's comments like that one about the Tata Nano and, one of my favorites, about the "hastily-built" glovebox on the TL, that give my eyeballs and neck some exercise and break up the day with a good chuckle.
As for the comment about CR being biased against U.S. cars because they didn't rank the CTS or Malibu first based on their road tests... better add C/D to the conspiracy too. Shoot, maybe they're in cahoots with CR to bring down the U.S. automakers by ranking U.S. cars just below the top in their tests. Yesss.... that is very logical, makes a lot of sense. I'll bet both CR and C/D can't wait until the Tata Nano comes over here someday, so they can rank it above all the small U.S. cars. I'll bet CR is already working on how to rig their road tests to make sure that the Nano exceeds its EPA fuel economy ratings in CR's tests.
What BMW does is they take a $12,000 BMW 3-Series...
Same thing for the Mercedes Benz C-Class...a $17,000 taxi...
Where are these cars sold for those prices? BMW UK shows starting price of 3 series at 21,000 pounds, which is over $40,000. M-B UK shows C class starting at about $23,000 pounds, which is almost $45,000.
pmc4: So, why then dosn't Honda source a V8 from GM? It can't be because GM's V8's pull Average reliability ratings; the answer is obviously because GM is not giving Honda permission to do so.?
In two sentences, we discover what exactly is wrong with all of your posts. Namely, that healthy doses of conjecture, mixed with your opinions passed off as fact, and levened with a dash of wishful thinking, cannot alter reality, no matter who fervently you wish.
First, you ask a question - why doesn't Honda source a GM V-8?
Then, you make a completely unrelated point - GM's V-8s pull average reliability ratings in Consumer Reports.
From there, you make a completely unsupported claim - that GM isn't giving Honda permission to use its V-8s - and pass this off as a fact, when there is absolutely no proof that Honda ever asked GM to use its V-8s.
You have provided absolutely no proof whatsoever that Honda ever asked GM to use its V-8s, or that it even wants to do so.
Given the number of well-placed spies and "leakers" within the auto industry, and the coverage of the industry by the print media (which includes buff books, industry specific publications such as Automotive News, and financial publications - The Wall Street Journal, Barron's, etc.), such a request would have been reported in the media.
No such request has ever been reported - if anything, it has been widely reported that Honda REFUSES to make its own V-8 for corporate policy (i.e, green) reasons.
One also wonders why Honda would want to tool up for a mass-produced V-8 (as opposed to an engine built in limited numbers) when the federal government just enacted stricter CAFE regulations.
GM, in response to those regulations, recently CANCELLED its next-generation Northstar V-8, not to mention a few rear-wheel drive mid-size cars. This is straight from Bob Lutz's mouth.
Your posts do suggest a talent for fiction writing, but this is not the best forum to display that talent...
pmc4: Not to mention an oversupply of old 5 speed transmissions from the 1990's they have to work through.
As opposed to all of those old four-speed automatic transmissions that GM is still using right now...
pmc4: Honda has a sub-compact (Fit), Compact (Civic), Lots of family sedans (Accord, TSX, TL, RL), Compact SUV (Pilot, CR-V), and a roadster (S2000). They need more than this to survive and flourish.
I'm sure that with GM's lineup, Honda would be "surviving and flourishing" like GM does...by experiencing massive drops in market share, racking up billions of dollars in losses and propping up sales figures by dumping a large percentage of production on Hertz, Avis and Alamo.
In the real world, this is not called surviving and flourshing, it is called "flirting with bankruptcy." Last time I checked, the worry was that GM would go bankrupt, not Honda.
I was already to tear apart PMC4's post but now I see that he is just a troll and not a very well educated one at that.
The nano does not use a manual transmission as that would be too expensive for such a low cost vehicle.
For example the Nano has a variable transmission instead of the standard gears
link title Even some basic research would have found that out.
BMW has never, ever, ever built a V6 engine. I can't seem them ever building a V6 engine as they are fully committed to the wonderful Inline six. Even the least powerful BMW turbo diesel makes 143 hp which is pretty freaking impressive from a less then 2.0 liter engine.
And lastly while I can't be 100% sure since I can't find it on the web I can be mostly sure that ZF makes the 6 speed auto in the three series as ZF makes nearly all automatic transmissions for BMW.
C'mon, you guys! I think Backy is the only one on this forum who's actually reading may less serious posts the way they were meant to be read: in levity.
"But it's comments like that one about the Tata Nano and, one of my favorites, about the "hastily-built" glovebox on the TL, that give my eyeballs and neck some exercise and break up the day with a good chuckle."
At least someone understands!
But on my serious notes; that is, that Consumer Reports is biased towards the import nameplate, that is where I get deadly serious. My "CONSUMER REPORTS BUSTS" are not to be taken lightly, nor should they be. This organisation is deliberately attacking and is bent on destroying the American auto industry because of some board members who has a grudge about a misplaced gas tank on a Ford truck that was made in like 1974. I am here to show that Consumer Reports is anything but unbiased! And on that we must take with the utmost in seriousness.
You mean to tell me that all those taxi's in Europe, Australia and just about every Aisian country are shelling out $40,000 for their BMW taxi's? $50,000 for their M/B taxi's? I don't believe it!
Dude! Honda isn't producing a V8 because they have a 'green' concience! In fact, Honda -- as I type this -- is less than 2 years away from bringing to market not a V8, but a gas-guzzling, atmosphere-choking, V10! So much for the idea that Honda is being a "good corporate citezen"!
Plus, why is it that the Honda S2000 generates as much pollutants as GM's smallblock V8. Go to EPA.gov if you don't believe me. Please, don't make me post the EPA link, as I've done that so many times to prove how Consumer Reports fudges their mileage results.
The truth of the matter is that Honda doesn't have a V8 in their staple because they don't have the money to develop one (yet they seem to have the money to develop an air-clogging V10? Could it be a careless and thoughtless business model like this one why they don't have a V8?). They don't have the money to develop environmentally-responsible hybrid powertrains like GM and Toyota does. As said previously, their FCX isn't meant to sell (and won't) because it's just window dressing to appease the myopic, ignorant environmentalists who still believe in the Tooth Fairie.
As for GM's 4-speed hydramatic, that's not the only tranny they have. GM sells some of the world's finest 6-speeds. Honda? A single 5-speed auto that's been seeing service now for over 15 years, and that's all they have. Pathetic, just pathetic.
Okay, we will all just believe the numbers that you apparently pulled out of your...
I have no idea what vehicles are used for taxis or what they pay for them. But I certainly do not believe that BMW and M-B sell the same car to fleets for 1/3 to 1/2 of the price that they sell to regular customers.
In the real world, this is not called surviving and flourshing, it is called "flirting with bankruptcy." Last time I checked, the worry was that GM would go bankrupt, not Honda.
Yes, and to the tune of a $38,000,000,000 loss in 2007. If I remember correctly, Honda made a pretty damn good profit...close to Porsche.
It looks to me that GM is going to fall to the wayside, unfortunately, just like the others. The new CAFE standards will be the final nail in the coffin. I'm not sure I buy into the whole global worming agenda. I have read that it is caused by abnormal sun flairs and that in all geothermal testing temperature change precludes a correlating Co2 change by about 100 years. However, I do know that SMOG is a man made problem, which the V8 contributes.
Hey folks, the conversation is now drifting into an area that's better suited for our Automotive News board. There are several existing discussions about GM & the automotive industry, so take a look at the selection there where you're going to generate more conversation.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name. 2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h) Review your vehicle
Comments
The key words are "to my knowledge" and it proves nothing. Most such cases are settled out of court with nondisclosure so, in fact, one will never know. Frivolity may be in the eye of the beholder.
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
Fourtunately this America-hater only got like 4% of the votes in the year 2000...
The fact of the matter is that my Dodge with 130 horses gave me the exact same fuel economy as my Honda with 240 horses. The Dodge was from the mid 90's and the Honda from 2003, but the Honda was also about 1,000 lbs heavier, and the bigger vehicle with a bigger 3.0L V6 vs. a smaller 2.0L I4 in the Dodge.
I think your pictures show that the TL is indeed, still the superior automobile with the superior interior and interior quality and fit and finish. I believe some of the so-called flaws you point out are really just design and styling choices, ques, and flavor! Color matching and coordination are purely 100% subjective. What you think matches might clash to me.
I'd take the TL interior anyday over the CTS. I looked over and test drove the new CTS. It's a very good car, but I don't care for the multiple layered, multiple material, multiple textured dashboard and console area. The soft fabric dashboard just doesn't work for me.... it looks and feels like an add-on a taxi cab driver uses. It reminds me of a dash board cover/mat sold aftermarket (I think some buy these to reduce glare in the sun on the windshield).
Anyone can file a lawsuit, but can it be upheld?
Maybe. Maybe not. But as I suggested earlier, any lawsuit can be settled out of court.
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
It reeks of condescension. Again, please read Edmunds' "Rules of the Road."
The number was fewer than 10, and all were basically "sour grapes / shoot the messenger" suits filed by companies whose products or services didn't score very well. In no case did CU lose -- most were dismissed by the courts at the first stage of the trials.
Let me get this straight: A front wheel Accord with an old V6 engine from the 1990's and a clunky 5-speed transmission beats the illustrious CTS?
Yes!! You got it straight. Isn't it amazing that the long-in-the-tooth Accord makeover beats a Cadillac according to CR? What does that say about the Standard of the World, the most recent engineering marvel from GM getting beat by an old Accord.
And, another magazine, R&T, confirms that that old Accord makeover, having the inferior FWD, actually beats the higher powered/torqued 08 CTS in a number of "measured" tests. These are: 0-60, 0-100, braking from 60, skidpad, fuel mileage. The disadvantaged FWD Accord makeover somehow manages 66.0 mph in slalom vs the "superior" RWD CTS which recorded a 66.6 mph. See R&T Feb 08 issue, page 96.
Supposedly, the TL will be redesigned for 09. Look for it to clobber the CTS in reviews by CR and R&T.
So you finally agree with the bias at CR? :P
This is where CR shows its bias toward a certain type of vehicle. Do you really think that the consumers who are buying cars in this country are really looking for "sporty handling"? I feel and know that CR auto reviewers do like the sporty driving and feel that cars should drove that way. They will try and say it is for safety but can anyone with a straight face really say the Camry and ES's are not safe? Now C&D can have that bias because that is what we know they are about and who their consumers are.
Sporty handling or not? Well, since I'm now a **cough** "mature" driver, I don't need super-sporty handling. Besides compared to what I learned to drive on and had during my younger years, the Camry is sporty enough for me (see my profile on past car ownership).
And yet it was stated above that Camry came in below others because it's handling was not "sporty" enough. nuf said. There is bias at CR. I would think that since they are not a "sports" oriented media outlet they would not have "sporty" as one of their criteria and go with what mainstream US desires.
CR by contrast (as of the Feb issue which does not include the new Malibu), had the Camry 4-cylinder as 4th out of 15 "affordable family sedans" and the Camry V6 as 3rd out of 15 "midpriced family sedans" (and the Camry Hybrid as 5th). This is based on their road tests, but when reliability is taken into account, the Camry V6 is not recommended.
In a separate "quick picks" sidebar in CR, only the Mazda 6, Subaru Legacy, and Nissan Altima V6 are listed as "sporty sedans." The Camry, including the Hybrid, are among the many "all around family cars" and the Hybrid is the only one cited under "best fuel economy."
And for that I apologise. It's important for you, Backy and others to understand that I mean no offense to you guys whatsoever! This is just the way I try to make a point, that's all. The reader isn't to blame, since much of this demands that you pay careful attention to what I write, and sometimes it gets lenghthy, and I have a lot of ideas regarding import bias at Consumer Reports to get across.
What I was trying to show was clear and obvious manufacturing and assembly defects in these Acura's that are not at all stated in Consumer Report's review of the car. My ultimate aim is to show the reader that we have import bias at Consumer Reports, and I am supplying the evidence that the reader may take into account. I'm glad you like the TL design over the CTS design. While Eyes on Design (headed by Chris Bangle of BMW Group) disagrees with you, "to each his own..."
Since every picture posted on the internet shows these same defects, we can surmise that these are bona-fide fit and finish defects with the car and not just "one car out of a million." Consumer Reports, if they wish to be unbiased, must be fair in their report of the problems with the Acura TL, and all import-branded cars.
An I4 that generates the same torque as a 1996 Chevy Cavalier, a V6 that doesn't even have VVT on the exhaust cam let alone advances like direct-injection and a clumsy 5-speed automatic transmission represents the bulk of Honda's powertrains and also represents the best Honda engineers can do. Pathetic. Just pathetic.
If C/R praises the quiet ride in the Camry, why don't they criticise the rough, bumpy ride in the Altima? If they praise the performance and handling of the Altima, why not criticise the lack thereof in the Camry?
I can't see how both the Altima and Camry can score like right next to each other unless, of course, both of these cars are imports.
I have found and noticed TL's scoring extremely well in reliability studies. I haven't seen too many complaints about the TL from it's owners. If these issues you claim were widespread, wouldn't you think the forums would be full of TL complaints?
For example, your point in this post is, once again, moot. What great GM technology is so your worship? What has GM really accomplished architecturally that Honda in all its F1 glory has not? And why has GM referred to Honda (the number one engine builder in the world) for engine technology and for utilizing its engines in some vehicles? What significant difference, pcm4, does the 3.6 DI make that justifies CR to rate the CTS number one? The TL engine is no more "ancient technology" than say (not to sound proverbial) any other garden variety production engine. Let's not forget that we are still dealing with a four stroke, gasoline powered engine that hasn't, in all its years, managed to achieve any great strides in efficiency. For your information, Ford's model T also achieved 25mpg and gave up most energy as heat. Nothing much has changed. Yes, there is a logical conspiracy behind this delay in advancement; however, I will not divulge the politics on this board.
Yes, the TL engine was derived out of the late 1980's NSX program, a car far more advanced than anything GM engineered until today. The NSX engine still, in many ways, supersedes the LS7 C6 Corvette's (an engine based on 1960's technology) and the TL's engine technology is on par in many ways to the CTS's. Let's not even get into the hybrid or hydrogen technology that Honda is kicking in the face of GM.
For argument's sake, what difference does it matter to a Honda owner as long as the TL has better fuel economy and better overall performance than the CTS? Not much. Hence, what is the urgency on Honda's part to make a change? Profits are strong at Honda and now that GM has caught up in "ancient technology", we will expect Honda to outdo itself, once again, with the next model.
All in all, let's just say that Honda got into the automotive business to support its racing habit -- the mother of technology in the automotive world.
PS: I don't hate GM; in fact, I like their newer products. I just want to set the record strait.
Besides performance, add value. According to CR, March 08 issue, page 51, the TL has a price of $33,670 vs $40,835 for CTS. That is a 21 percent premium for a lesser vehicle in the CTS. You pay more for CTS and get less. Exception would be gross weigh. CTS is a porker, but maybe some would say this is a positive for having "road hugging" weight.
By the way, "The King of 2006 Recall" post is on this website: link title
GM recalled almost 90+ % the vehicles they sold in 2006. :lemon: :lemon: :lemon:
Oh yeah...the 3.5L J35 from Honda Motor Company in the Saturn Vue, was not one of them.
When you let magazines decide what cars you like, you end like....pmc4. I can't believe this discussion has gone on this long.
LOL, but you know tidester. :P
Seems if my product is falsely libeled and I am losing sales, the last thing I would want is nondisclosure. The first thing I would want is a written retraction from the reporting source, then monetary compensation.
tidester, host
SUVs and Smart Shopper
2007 recall data shows that GM had the fewest vehicle recalls of all major OEMs. Toyota/Honda had a few more even thought they sold fewer vehicles. Ford is the one the sticks out with a huge quantity.
Again data shows that quality, as measured by things gone wrong, is pretty much even now.
I forget what the '06 data was exactly but it was onlyslightly higher than '07.
First off, very little of Honda's otherwise fantastic F1 program actually makes its way down to the Honda vehicle. The last and only time Honda applied F1 technology was in the first VTEC engine that powered the NSX, as you know. The SH-AWD has no real F1 heritage behind it.
There is nothing that the consumer vehicle can benefit from an F1 racing program. Think of it: 800 horsepower with very little torque can't be applied to automobiles. This is why the LS7 is a better consumer engine than the V8 that powers the Ferrari F430 (just look at the numbers: Z06 = 505/495 and gets around 17 MPG and F430 = 485/350 and gets around 14 MPG).
There is nothing carbon fiber unequal control arms can benefit strut towers. There is no benefit in a 400 microsecond paddle shift (by virtue, inexpensive luxo-boats like the G35 have paddle shifters that meet or exceed Ferrari F1 in terms of shift speed). So don't think for a moment thAt Honda's F1 program is seeing its winning ways down to garden vareity Honda vehicles.
THe last Honda product GM ever used was a SOHC V6 that Saturn had to use before widespread implimentation of the better engine: GM's 3.6 liter global engine/6 speed Hydramatic transmission pair.
If anything, Honda needs to source a V8 from GM, preferably the LS3. The Northstar V8 would be nice, also. And judging by the turbo Ecotec, Honda can disparge their F20C and replace it with said turbo Ecotec.
You acknowledge that Honda is behind the times as far as drivetrain technology is concerned, and that's good. Your excuse is politics, and you may be correct. Probably related to new CAFE or CARB requirements, but I'm not entirely sure...
The NSX fell behind when the first 21st-Century Corvette Z06 was released in 2002.
As far as an "NSX versus LS^" comparison is concerned, there is none. The Honda VTEC V6 was advanced for its time, but that was years and years ago. The engine by todays standards is a turd that can barely squeak out 290 horsepower at less than 250 ft/lbs torque. It had VVT on the intake cam only. There were no dual intake runners and no variable phasing. Titanium con-rods are fine, though.
There is, of course, no comparison with the LS7, which is a detuned version of Chevrolet's C6-R engine -- the winningest engine at LeMans now for eight years straight.
Thus, we're comparing a V6 that's sub-standard in virtually every respect to a garden-vareity V6 today with a detuned engine that's familiar with winning podium finishes in the world's most prestigious endurance races.
How you think the two (LS7 versus 1st-generation VTEC V6) can be compared is far beyond my very considerable level of comprehension. I don't even think a delusional 16 year-old masturbating to the tuner layouts in the latest issue of Sport Compact magazine would make such a fanatical claim. Let's move on.
I don't think Honda will "outdo itself with the next model" or any model for that matter. Honda's latest products are already yielding to GM products, such as the Malibu. Honda yielded to Saturn when Saturn introduced the Sky RedLine and Honda took the S2000 of the market. Car and Driver is already saying the Ecotec is more refined than Honda's I4 workhorse. Not just "as refined", but more refined.
Acura products aren't anything groundbreaking. Honda's former good fit and finish is now the industry average. They don't have the money to support any meaningful hybrid program (and we know the FCX and other hydrogen vehicles are just window dressing). We'll never see a decent hybrid on the Ridgeline like we've seen GM do with the second-generation hybrid powertrain on the Tahoe Hybrid (as it now stands, GM is now the industry leader in hybrid technologies, since Toyota is still meandering in the maze of mediocracy with their first-generation hybrid platforms).
I agree Honda has an excellent racing program, but let's not forget their absence at Lemans and ALMS -- the racing program that Chevrolet domi
Unless one is an engineering director at Honda, how can this be said with certainty? Is it possible that some of the numerous processes, sub-processes and engineering methods/disciplines used in F1 program in designing/building engines/transmissions are passed on to mundane everyday design/engineering for Honda street cars? Are personnel in the F1 program rotated to production Honda engineering?
I agree Honda has an excellent racing program, but let's not forget their absence at Lemans and ALMS -- the racing program that Chevrolet domi
Let's not forget that Chevrolet became non-competitive in IRL and dropped out. The engines supplied by Honda to IRL have shown to be highly reliable over last few seasons. What an embarassment to GM and Chevrolet that the world's premier racing event, INDY 500, has had a starting grid of all cars powered by Honda.
People watching the 500 on TV in US and all around world are made aware of this and all the cars have Honda brand prominently displayed. Surely, Roger Penske has the "IN" with GM to get Chevrolet engines and racing support from them if he thought that Chevrolet was better than Honda. Penske, of course, uses Honda.
GM's showcase of racing to America is NASCAR and these cars are powered by dinosaur engines with pushrods and carburators. Really high-tech, eh? Toyota had to build an ancient engine design in order to compete in NASCAR.
But, getting back to who builds better engines, let's look at April 07 issue of CR at reliability ratings. Look at Engine Major and Engine Minor. Acura and Accord mostly show full red cirlces, a few half red circles and a half-black circle for S2000 in year 02. Next, check out Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet, Pontiac, Saturn. Find a lot of black circles, half black circles. Saab, who is owned by GM has lots of black. The Cadillac Deville, Seville models have a lot of black circles.
The Chevrolet Corvette V8, for years 2001-2006, with 12 rating circles, only manages 6 full red circles.
Contrast Engine Major and Engine Minor ratings of GM vehicles years 2001-2006 to long-in-the-tooth Accord makeover model "Acura". For six Acura models shown, and 58 ratings, 55 of those ratings are full red circle and 3 are half-red circle.
Case Closed. GM has not shown by CR that it can build a better engine than Honda/Acura, "The Engine Company".
First off, NASCAR is just a rolling advertisement and little more. I can't see how anyone thinks NASCAR is a venerable or verifiable intrnational racing circuit. It's just something rednecks like watching to pass time on a saturday afternoon while slugging down a cold Budweiser. Why you brought it up defies reason or logic.
Secondly, if Honda was all about reliability (to the extent that they wouldn't use an engine that risks getting anything under C/R's "Red doughnut"), then why do they cotinue with average cars like the Oddessey? Or S2000? Or TSX? Or any other car that's equipped with the F20C and its turbo variants? Why don't they axe them or insist that the engine be removed from all models?
I'll tell you why: It's because cars equipped with said engines are selling, and their reliability is good enough. So good, in fact, that there's no real need to replace them. With exception to three recalls, the engine has been doing just fine.
So, why then dosn't Honda source a V8 from GM? It can't be because GM's V8's pull Average reliability ratings; the answer is obviously because GM is not giving Honda permission to do so.
Honda does not have their own resources to bring a V8 to market. Furthermore, Honda is not sourcing another automobile manufacturer to aquire a V8. The only explination we are left with, therefore, is that the other automobile manufacturers are not selling Honda any V8 engines, meaning Honda is stuck with archaic and technologically inept SOHC V6's and feeble I4's (this also explains why Honda does not have a premium luxury brand. And no, Acura does not count as a luxury brand). Not to mention an oversupply of old 5 speed transmissions from the 1990's they have to work through.
As for IRL, that's fine that Honda is teh Numero Uno there. I'm happy for them, and Penske is, too. May Honda keep on winning and winning there. How this will help them bring modern technology to the consumer like GM is doing I do not know, but GOOO Honda!
Unless one is an engineering director at Honda, how can this be said with certainty? Is it possible that some of the numerous processes, sub-processes and engineering methods/disciplines used in F1 program in designing/building engines/transmissions are passed on to mundane everyday design/engineering for Honda street cars? Are personnel in the F1 program rotated to production Honda engineering?
The only way Honda can become competitive in the automotive sector is if they drop their SOHC behemoths and clunky transmissions, add a V8 to their lineup somehow and start making environmentally-concious products (think Honda Ridgeline hybrid). Just making a bunch of cheap, I4 economy cars and family sedans won't cut it while Toyota and GM are making hybrid powertrains that use less fuel than the Honda trucks yet are towing and carrying a lot more.
It would be nice to actually see a substantial lineup from Honda in the first place. Heck. Honda doesn't even have a real sportscar. In that respect, Honda isn't farther ahead than Kia or Hyundai, for cryin' out loud!
Honda does not have the following models in their lineup, whereas a normal car manufacturer does:
1/2-ton pickup truck
Sportscar that can go to 60 MPH in under like 8 seconds.
Premium sedan (RL doesn't count. A premium sedan has to seat more than like four little people and carry more than a purse with a small bag of groceries.)
Premium truck
Large SUV
Something with a hybrid powertrain. I mean, at least something on four wheels here.
A luxury car division. Acura doesn't count, because Acura's are just rebadged Honda econo-boxes and family sedans.
A really, really fast exotic sportscar. Even Toyota is making progress here.
A large sedan, premium or not.
Honda has a sub-compact (Fit), Compact (Civic), Lots of family sedans (Accord, TSX, TL, RL), Compact SUV (Pilot, CR-V), and a roadster (S2000). They need more than this to survive and flourish.
Honda might also think about replacing their design team. Why? Maybe this should help:
And we all know who the chief Designer in charge of designing the two vehicles shown above, it must have been this little fella:
The problem with you urging everyone to resarch my claims is that after they do research my claims, they'll end up with the same conclusions I'm ending up with.
...And we already know what those conclusions are.
On the Malibu, it's now CR's fourth-ranked family car, in a tie point-wise with the Camry and just two points behind the 2nd-place Accord, also a new design this year. The Altima is on top of the group. As with the CTS, CR was very positive about the Malibu in its comments.
So much for CR being biased against U.S. cars. Yup, they are so biased that they rank a U.S. car above long-term luxury stalwarts such as the 3 Series and Mercedes, and in a virtual tie with the two long-time benchmarks of the family car class, the Accord and Camry. Apparently the "Bash the U.S. Cars" team at CR has taken a sabbatical.
Now if only the "Bash Honda" leader here could take a break, we could move on.
On the Malibu, it's now CR's fourth-ranked family car, in a tie point-wise with the Camry and just two points behind the 2nd-place Accord, also a new design this year. The Altima is on top of the group.
funny, but hasn't CR rated the asians above everyone else? Looks like that continues. CTS is wonderful but not quite good enough. Same with Malibu. Sorry but I am not saying CR is biased but your proof does not prove otherwise.
In Europe, the BMW 3-Series is viewed as a practical alternative to walking or riding a bicycle. That's why most taxi's in Europe are BMW 3-Series cars. What BMW does is they take a $12,000 BMW 3-Series, add vinyl to its interior, add an upgraded stereo and remove the 80 horsepower diesel engine and replace it with an engine that's only slightly less crude: a 230 horsepower V6 that barely eeks out 198 ft/lbs of torque. Because by their very nature, taxi's are a cheap source of transportation with cheap drivetrains. The 3-Series is no exception, which explains why you get an automatic transmission with the 328i if and only if you're lucky. If you're not, you're stuck with a manual transmission, which is the same kind of transmission that's also standard in the $2,500 Tata Nano economy car.
For all 3-Series cars headed stateside, interiors are upgraded from mouse fur seating surfaces to naugahyde seating surfaces. Wood inserts are added where there was exposed sheetmetal. Luxury features such as air conditioning and power windows come standard, whereas they are options on all 3-Series taxi's in Europe.
The automatic transmission that's used in the upgraded 3-Series is General Motor's Turbo Hydramatic 6-speed unit.
Here's the 3-Series typically seen on Europe's streets:
Here's the same car but with the $30,000 increase in sticker price you pay for in options, such as air conditioning, vinyl seating surfaces and some strips of wood, that typify a US-issue 3-Series:
So as we can see, it's not like the 2008 CTS was up against any significant competition or anything...
Same thing for the Mercedes Benz C-Class: Nothing but a glorified European taxi:
^^^ What's luxury in our country is a taxi/beater in Europe, because Mercedes Benz knows that wealthy people in the US are dumb. So dumb in fact that they know you can throw anything, regardless of how rudimentary -- with a 3-pointed star on it to rich Americans and the American will buy it. A $17,000 taxi sold in America with leatherette seats, an upgraded stereo and air conditioning for a whopping $40,000. Ca-ching!!!
Not a taxi, and not a Eropean econo-box with power windows and air conditioning. Just the world's finest luxury sport sedan, folks:
So, in closing, let's not get all suprised that the world's finest sport sedan really did beat out the taxis in Consumer Report's testing in March. THere's only so long Consumer Reports can carry on the frauds on wheels by Benz and BMW.
We are only now beginning to see the revealing of these European frauds. Likewise, we are starting to see the fit and finish frauds fro Japan; that Japanese family cars are no better and no worse than their domestic counterparts. There's only so long Consumer Reports can carry these automotive frauds before the truth comes pounding on their doors.
It's no suprise the CTS beat out the European taxi's, but likewise, it's no surprise the CTS lost to the Accord/TL with Consumer Reports, because the TL is an import.
I've already explained at lenght that the domestic car that's considered the finest sport sedan in the world was beat by a front wheel sedan built on a flimsy family sedan platform with an outdated SOHC engine and clunky, 1990's era transmission just because the former is a domestic and the latter is an import.
I rest my case!
As for the comment about CR being biased against U.S. cars because they didn't rank the CTS or Malibu first based on their road tests... better add C/D to the conspiracy too. Shoot, maybe they're in cahoots with CR to bring down the U.S. automakers by ranking U.S. cars just below the top in their tests. Yesss.... that is very logical, makes a lot of sense. I'll bet both CR and C/D can't wait until the Tata Nano comes over here someday, so they can rank it above all the small U.S. cars. I'll bet CR is already working on how to rig their road tests to make sure that the Nano exceeds its EPA fuel economy ratings in CR's tests.
Same thing for the Mercedes Benz C-Class...a $17,000 taxi...
Where are these cars sold for those prices? BMW UK shows starting price of 3 series at 21,000 pounds, which is over $40,000. M-B UK shows C class starting at about $23,000 pounds, which is almost $45,000.
In two sentences, we discover what exactly is wrong with all of your posts. Namely, that healthy doses of conjecture, mixed with your opinions passed off as fact, and levened with a dash of wishful thinking, cannot alter reality, no matter who fervently you wish.
First, you ask a question - why doesn't Honda source a GM V-8?
Then, you make a completely unrelated point - GM's V-8s pull average reliability ratings in Consumer Reports.
From there, you make a completely unsupported claim - that GM isn't giving Honda permission to use its V-8s - and pass this off as a fact, when there is absolutely no proof that Honda ever asked GM to use its V-8s.
You have provided absolutely no proof whatsoever that Honda ever asked GM to use its V-8s, or that it even wants to do so.
Given the number of well-placed spies and "leakers" within the auto industry, and the coverage of the industry by the print media (which includes buff books, industry specific publications such as Automotive News, and financial publications - The Wall Street Journal, Barron's, etc.), such a request would have been reported in the media.
No such request has ever been reported - if anything, it has been widely reported that Honda REFUSES to make its own V-8 for corporate policy (i.e, green) reasons.
One also wonders why Honda would want to tool up for a mass-produced V-8 (as opposed to an engine built in limited numbers) when the federal government just enacted stricter CAFE regulations.
GM, in response to those regulations, recently CANCELLED its next-generation Northstar V-8, not to mention a few rear-wheel drive mid-size cars. This is straight from Bob Lutz's mouth.
Your posts do suggest a talent for fiction writing, but this is not the best forum to display that talent...
pmc4: Not to mention an oversupply of old 5 speed transmissions from the 1990's they have to work through.
As opposed to all of those old four-speed automatic transmissions that GM is still using right now...
pmc4: Honda has a sub-compact (Fit), Compact (Civic), Lots of family sedans (Accord, TSX, TL, RL), Compact SUV (Pilot, CR-V), and a roadster (S2000). They need more than this to survive and flourish.
I'm sure that with GM's lineup, Honda would be "surviving and flourishing" like GM does...by experiencing massive drops in market share, racking up billions of dollars in losses and propping up sales figures by dumping a large percentage of production on Hertz, Avis and Alamo.
In the real world, this is not called surviving and flourshing, it is called "flirting with bankruptcy." Last time I checked, the worry was that GM would go bankrupt, not Honda.
The nano does not use a manual transmission as that would be too expensive for such a low cost vehicle.
For example the Nano has a variable transmission instead of the standard gears
link title
Even some basic research would have found that out.
BMW has never, ever, ever built a V6 engine. I can't seem them ever building a V6 engine as they are fully committed to the wonderful Inline six. Even the least powerful BMW turbo diesel makes 143 hp which is pretty freaking impressive from a less then 2.0 liter engine.
link title
And lastly while I can't be 100% sure since I can't find it on the web I can be mostly sure that ZF makes the 6 speed auto in the three series as ZF makes nearly all automatic transmissions for BMW.
I think Backy is the only one on this forum who's actually reading may less serious posts the way they were meant to be read: in levity.
"But it's comments like that one about the Tata Nano and, one of my favorites, about the "hastily-built" glovebox on the TL, that give my eyeballs and neck some exercise and break up the day with a good chuckle."
At least someone understands!
But on my serious notes; that is, that Consumer Reports is biased towards the import nameplate, that is where I get deadly serious. My "CONSUMER REPORTS BUSTS" are not to be taken lightly, nor should they be. This organisation is deliberately attacking and is bent on destroying the American auto industry because of some board members who has a grudge about a misplaced gas tank on a Ford truck that was made in like 1974.
I am here to show that Consumer Reports is anything but unbiased! And on that we must take with the utmost in seriousness.
I don't believe it!
Plus, why is it that the Honda S2000 generates as much pollutants as GM's smallblock V8. Go to EPA.gov if you don't believe me. Please, don't make me post the EPA link, as I've done that so many times to prove how Consumer Reports fudges their mileage results.
The truth of the matter is that Honda doesn't have a V8 in their staple because they don't have the money to develop one (yet they seem to have the money to develop an air-clogging V10? Could it be a careless and thoughtless business model like this one why they don't have a V8?). They don't have the money to develop environmentally-responsible hybrid powertrains like GM and Toyota does. As said previously, their FCX isn't meant to sell (and won't) because it's just window dressing to appease the myopic, ignorant environmentalists who still believe in the Tooth Fairie.
As for GM's 4-speed hydramatic, that's not the only tranny they have. GM sells some of the world's finest 6-speeds.
Honda? A single 5-speed auto that's been seeing service now for over 15 years, and that's all they have. Pathetic, just pathetic.
I have no idea what vehicles are used for taxis or what they pay for them. But I certainly do not believe that BMW and M-B sell the same car to fleets for 1/3 to 1/2 of the price that they sell to regular customers.
falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus
Well, that's just what I've had to do. Get used to it.
Yes, and to the tune of a $38,000,000,000 loss in 2007. If I remember correctly, Honda made a pretty damn good profit...close to Porsche.
It looks to me that GM is going to fall to the wayside, unfortunately, just like the others. The new CAFE standards will be the final nail in the coffin. I'm not sure I buy into the whole global worming agenda. I have read that it is caused by abnormal sun flairs and that in all geothermal testing temperature change precludes a correlating Co2 change by about 100 years. However, I do know that SMOG is a man made problem, which the V8 contributes.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle